The Effects of Turkey's Referendum on Its CMR

Dauren Koptleuov

On April 17, Recep Taiyp Erdogan announced the victory for his campaign in the National referendum on significant constitutional changes in the Turkish Parliament. Success of the “Yes” campaign granted Erdogan considerable expansion of powers, turning Turkey’s parliamentary system into presidential (Al-Jazeera, 2017). Media reports tell about severe violations and fraudulence during the polls; prosecution of media; threats and various pressure on the supporters of “No” campaign; massive protests on the streets led by outraged crowd (Huffington Post, 2017). Apparently, Erdogan denies it all, and he certainly has his reasons.

After the attempt of coup d’état last summer, Erdogan strives to secure his position and increase the influence of his figure over the state by proposing constitutional changes. It is reported that the results of recent referendum will most probably be followed with more purges, imprisonments, adoption of the death penalty and development of a nuclear weapon (Huffington Post, 2017). In some way or another, the victory of the Erdogan’s campaign will have a significant effect on Turkish civil-military relations as well.

First of all, the results of constitutional referendum will abolish the functioning Turkish legislature with Binali Yildirim (Turkish prime-minister) in the head of it (The Washington Post, 2017). According to Giraldo (2008), the key function of legislature is to work as a check on the power and influence of executive on the defense sector, as well as maintaining “accountability, legitimacy and transparency” of the policy (Giraldo, 2008 as cited in Bruneau and Tollefson, 2008). In the current context of Turkey, the first function lost its purpose and the second one will presumably narrow down to “loyalty to ruling party” and to be promoted by the military police.

Speaking of the military police, Erdogan most probably wants to be aware of everything that happens within the Turkish military in order to avoid repeated coup attempt. This increases the likelihood that Erdogan can create special task force that would either implicitly or explicitly control the military from within. Considering that the percentage of “Yes” and “No” voters is quite levelled: 51.3% against 48.7%, Turkey is seemingly experiencing big division over political preferences. Apart from creation military police and regular purges, Erdogan is likely to enhance paramilitary forces that will secure his safety, even if the coup or insurgency would actually happen. Therefore, it can be said that Turkish military budget will probably also be the subject to change.

Finally, such increase in political powers of a single person may also affect the military doctrine of the state. Erdogan, as a political leader, fits perfectly the term “boss”, described by the Weeks (2014). She states that such authoritarian leaders, that have low possibility of being influenced by other political elites and high level of war-prone behavior, usually have higher possibility of war initiation as well (Weeks, 2014). Taking into consideration recent statements about stopping the fight with ISIS and plans of nuclear weapons (Huffington Post, 2017), it can be assumed that Turkey may start to pose threats to neighbor states as well international community, which may become the primary topic of interest very soon.

__________________
Links and references:

Bruneau, Thomas C., and Scott D. Tollefson. 2008. Who Guards the Guardians and How: Democratic Civil-Military Relations. University of Texas Press.

Weeks, Jessica L. P. 2014. Dictators at War and Peace. Ithaca; London: Cornell University Press.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/turkey-referendum-ak-party-claims-victory-170416162645193.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/turkish-referendum-when-democracy-falls-short-of-a_us_58f23649e4b048372700d8a9

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/04/17/what-erdogans-narrow-referendum-victory-means-for-turkey/?utm_term=.cb0808f32636

Interesting Facts about Coups

Dinara Khalelova


Recently on July 2016, in Turkey was one of the bloodiest coup attempts. Turkey`s armed forces tried to overthrow the President Erdogan. However, thousands of citizens gathered together and were protecting their leader. Before, Turkey has faced two more military coups, but it was the first time, when citizens were involved in standing against of the coup.  As a result, this coup in Turkey has failed.  So, that coup was special one in the history of Turkey. This short blog will cover several interesting facts about coups, particularly about Turkey and Mali coups.

First of all, it is important to start from looking at the results of coups. It is interesting that sometimes coups reach successful endings. According to Thyne and Powell (2016), approximately the half coup attempts have failed, what means that another half of coups ended successfully. Moreover, authors have calculated the number of coups that led countries to democratization, it is 6 percent from all coups, and the number of coups that led to a dictatorship is 3 percent.

Another interesting thing happened during the coup in Turkey was the increase of requests in Google search with questions “How to stop a tank?” As it was said before, simple people gathered together on streets, and were fighting against the military of Turkey in order to defend their president. For this reason, in YouTube appeared videos with instructions for defeating tanks.  In addition to this, opponents of Gulen in order to show their disappointment were trying to humiliate him by firing and destroying all books written by him, and made public toilet from his home, where he grew up.

According to List 25 (2017), one of the most violent coups after 2000 was Malian coup in 2012. The New York Times (2012) claims that Senegal soldiers wanted to overthrow current President Amadou Toumani Touré, and attacked the capital Bamako. As a result, number of victims was a huge, about 15 000 soldiers were killed, but despite this fact the coup has ended successfully. One more interesting thing was posted by The Washington Post that the leader of the coup, Captain Amadou Haya Sanogo several times has trained in the United States.

___________

http://beyazgazete.com/haber/2016/7/23/gulen-in-dogdugu-ev-umumi-tuvalet-oluyor-3393022.html

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/10-amazing-facts-about-turkeys-failed-coup-attempt.aspx?pageID=238&nID=102122&NewsCatID=550

Thyne, Clayton L., and Jonathan M. Powell. 2016. “Coup D’´etat or Coup d’Autocracy? How Coups Impact Democratization, 1950–2008.” Foreign Policy Analysis 12(2): 192–213.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/world/africa/mali-coup-france-calls-for-elections.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/leader-of-mali-military-coup-trained-in-us/2012/03/23/gIQAS7Q6WS_story.html?utm_term=.6780080b4f55

Failed Coup in Turkey and the New Referendum

By: Azamat Kabdrash

Turkey has become an object of increased interest in recent times. One of widely discussed issues is the referendum which is held on April 16. It intended to make considerable changes to Turkish Constitution by changing governmental structure from parliamentary to presidential (al Jazeera, 2017). Also, the agitation campaign of the referendum addressed to Turkish diaspora in Germany and Netherlands led to diplomatic tension between these countries and Turkey. Number of officials from different countries also condemned Erdogan’s actions arguing that it undermines democracy in the country.
Recently, the Washington Post published an article written by Seyla Benhabib, professor of political science and philosophy at Yale University, who argued that Turkey is about to transforming to a country ruled by a dictatorship.  She claimed that if the referendum passes – which already happened – Erdogan will have supreme authority. The National Assembly will lose its power, whereas the judiciary will be controlled by Erdogan as he will have a power to appoint ministers and judges. The article also claimed that it was failed attempt of military coup in July last year which fostered this process. Here, I want to examine this event from the perspective of the readings that we have covered during the course. Powel (2014), for instance, argued that in post-Cold War period coups positively affect democratization in autocratic countries while being harmful for democracies.  He claimed that coups in unstable states can act as a “democratic shock”.   However, this hypothesis is applied to successful coups, the ones after which military controls the power for more than 7 days. In the case of coup in Turkey, it failed. So, according to the author it should not have affected seriously the government regime. Nevertheless, Powel, in his later paper written together with Thyne claimed that unsuccessful coups in autocratic states, on the other hand, might cause autocratic leader to purge his opponents. In fact, the referendum held in Turkey after the coup can be a good justification to that theory. The coup attempt was the main reason behind the new changes which would give the president more power.  So, does it mean that Erdogan is autocratic leader? The results of the referendum indicates that Turkey is about to turn to executive presidential system. The failed coup was a good impulse to make it happen.
Some sources say that the coup was poorly organized and thus was predestined to fail. Other sources, including government officials, claimed that it was very well organized and almost succeeded. There is a good reason to consider the coup as being well prepared: from the first minutes the military ceased the airport, took the chief commander to hostage, and ceased official TV channel and blocked main streets. Erdogan himself asked people to fight back the military by going out to the streets. Anyway, the failed coup followed by the referendum caused adverse effect to democratization in the country. Such trend is unusual in Post-Cold War period. So, probably additional research should be done to complement studies on coups.  
___________________

[1] Washingtonpost.com, “Turkey is about to take another step toward dictatorship”, published on March 16, 2017

[2] Powel M. Jonathan, “An assessment of democratic coup theory”, African Security Review, 23:3, 2014

The Turkish path to One-man Rule

Akbota Karibayeva

A week of parliamentary debates on the controversial bill that would implement serious constitutional changes to the political system of Turkey has finished on January 16 by the two-third majority vote in favor. The popular referendum is now to decide whether the position of prime minister in the Turkish government is to be abolished, the president’s power is to be increased, and the independence of judicial branch - undermined.

While the future of the Turkish state is (hopefully) in the hands of Turkish people, the way president Erdogan has played the post-coup situation to his own benefit is worth noting. The attempted military coup that took place in mid-July 2016 resulted in intensification of the sense of crisis and people’s need in ensuring the strong government. Reinforced by the terrorist attacks, the coup facilitated people’s unification and greater endorsement of the Erdogan’s regime. This, in turn, unleashed a justified abuse human rights in pursuit of restoration of stability.

Yet, Erdogan did not limit himself by a witch-hunt on the suspected organizers of the coup. He went further and made use of the political opportunity to cement his position by proposing a bill that would have hardly played out previously. Now, when the public supports him as never before and a good number of pro-Kurdish opposition (HDP) MPs is imprisoned for indirect association with Fethullah Gulen, Erdogan is one step away from declaring a one-man rule in Turkey. Accusing the current judiciary in falling under the influence of Gulen - the coup organizer according to the Turkish government - Erdogan made a good case for justifying the extension of president’s powers to directly intervene in the judiciary. The proposed changes are intended to elevate the Turkish political system to the level of that in France and the US. Indeed, I would agree, “efficient government”, as Erdogan sells it, is urgently needed in Turkey. But it does not have to be a dictatorship.

Was the coup organized by Gulen, as the government claims, or it was all staged by Erdogan’s regime? We don't know. What we do know, though, is that Erdogan has clearly played this card very well for himself.

This case demonstrates that, indeed, military insecurity causes a paradoxical reaction chain, just like Porter has described in his “War and the Rise of the State” (1994). On the one hand, the attempted coup mobilized the Turkish people from different party backgrounds to go out and protest against the putschists. On the other hand, the people, even having learned from the Amnesty International about the terrible extensive human rights abuses by the government, did not start doubting the regime’s authority. This way, the sense of military emergency caused a flash of democratic mobilization that not-yet-but-almost resulted in a more dictatorial regime.